Bristow v Adams

Case [2011] NSWDC 11


District Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Bristow v Adams [2011] NSWDC 11
Hearing dates:7, 8, 9 and 10 June, 8 October 2010
Decision date: 24 March 2011
Before: Levy SC DCJ
Decision:

1.Verdict and judgment for the defendant;

2.I will hear the parties on the appropriate order for costs;

3.The exhibits may be returned;

4.Liberty to apply on 7 days notice if further orders are required .

Catchwords: TORTS - defamation - email resignation by employee distributed through employer's email server to co-employees and managers - defamatory content - hurt feelings - whether elements of the tort established - whether injury to reputation established - whether defences established; DAMAGES - assessment of damages for defamation; COSTS - application by plaintiff for costs against a non-party - former solicitor - procedural fairness requires notice and particulars
Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005, ss 62(1), 62(3)
Defamation Act 2005, ss 20, 25, 26, 28, 30, 31, 33
Evidence Act 1995, ss 61(2), 62, 71
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005, r 7.29
Cases Cited: Bristow v Adams [2010] NSWDC 64
Chase v Newspapers Limited [2002] EWCA Civ 17
Cohen v Daily Telegraph Ltd [1968] 1 WLR 916
Dow Jones and Company Inc v Gutnick [2002] HCA 56; 210 CLR 57
Hepburn v TCN Channel Nine Pty Ltd (1983) 2 NSWLR 664
Maisel v Financial Times Limited [1915] 3 KB 336
Mirror Newspapers Ltd v Fitzpatrick (1984) 1 NSWLR 643
Roberts v Bass [2002] HCA 57; 212 CLR 1
Sims v Wran (1984) 1 NSWLR 317
State of NSW v Deren [1999] NSWCA 22
State of NSW v Riley [2003] NSWCA 208; (2003) 57 NSWLR 496
Category:Principal judgment
Parties: Alan Bristow (Plaintiff)
Tracy Adams (Defendant)
Representation: Mr B Goldsmith (Solicitor for the plaintiff until the close of evidence)
Mr M Duncan (Counsel for the defendant for final submissions)
Mr CA Evatt with Mr R Rasmussen (Counsel for the defendant)
Barrie Goldsmith (Solicitor for the plaintiff until the close of evidence)
Lyons and Lyons (Solicitor for the plaintiff for final submissions)
Stacks Goudkamp (Solicitor for the defendant)
File Number(s):4259 of 2009 2009/337286

Judgment

Nature of case and background

  1. The plaintiff, Alan Bristow, has brought these proceedings against the defendant Tracy Adams, a former co-employee at their former common place of work. The plaintiff was the defendant's former work supervisor. The defendant addressed her " I Quit " emailed letter of resignation to the plaintiff. It was also emailed to another manager in the company, and to two other branch offices of the company. As a consequence, by electronic means, that email was distributed to a number of other employees within the electronic communications network of the company, both in NSW and at the head office of the company in Queensland. The email in question contained remarks that were clearly disparaging of the plaintiff. The plaintiff claims that the email had defamed him.

  1. The proceedings were the subject of an earlier interlocutory judgment. The claimed imputations were included…

Continue reading Bristow v Adams

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Bristow v Adams [2011] NSWDC 11
Case
[2011] NSWDC 11
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Bristow v Adams involved a dispute over an email sent by the defendant, Adams, to the plaintiff, Bristow, and other employees, which was considered defamatory. The plaintiff alleged that the content of the email, which was sent through the employer's email server, caused hurt feelings and injured the plaintiff's reputation. The matter was heard in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia, where the plaintiff sought damages for defamation. The defendant argued that the plaintiff had not established the elements of the tort of defamation, and that there was no injury to reputation.

The court was required to determine whether the elements of the tort of defamation had been established, whether there was injury to reputation, and whether any defences were available to the defendant. The court also had to consider the assessment of damages for defamation and the plaintiff's application for costs against a non-party, the former solicitor. The court held that the plaintiff had not established the elements of the tort of defamation, and that there was no injury to reputation. The court also held that the plaintiff's application for costs against the non-party was procedurally unfair as it did not provide the non-party with notice and particulars.

The court found in favour of the defendant and dismissed the plaintiff's claim. The court will hear the parties on the appropriate order for costs and will return the exhibits to the parties. The plaintiff has been given liberty to apply on seven days' notice if further orders are required.

Orders

Orders of the court

1.Verdict and judgment for the defendant;

2.I will hear the parties on the appropriate order for costs;

3.The exhibits may be returned;

4.Liberty to apply on 7 days notice if further orders are required .

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.